Friday, 3 March 2017

The McCann trial

Looking at the picture above, the man with a beard in the centre is holding a pitchfork. The woman a torch and the man behind an axe. We are trying to be helpful. To let people know which is which.

People may not be aware but the McCann trial in Britain has begun and is taking place and from what we have witnessed, we think it’s best clarify what objects are involved in a lynching mob as we certainly don’t want to see people looking silly trying, for example, to light up a pitchfork.

Last week, we showed how – and why – the McCann
complaint against the Supreme Justice Court had been a manoeuvre to
regain, even if only temporarily, the ‘innocent-look’ for the McCanns.

To
sum up a very long post, it was to have the McCanns continue to be
perceived as being declared innocent by the Portuguese when government
has to decide about granting or not Operation Grange further funds for
the next fiscal year.

That was, or is, a risky move, or one filled with uncertainty.

Uncertainty
not about the outcome of the complaint but because it may not convince
the government and it may even backfire as the response from the Supreme
Justice Court will highlight even further how the McCanns were
never cleared.

But there’s one thing that there’s absolutely no uncertainty about: how the McCanns are to look neglectful.

It benefits all scenarios, even truth, or partial truth as we call it.

By
concentrating all bad imagery on the McCanns beforehand, it focuses the
beam of the spotlight just on them and that leaves all others caught
just by a slight twilight or not even no light at all.

Both in
the largely undefined, very vague and quite obscure European human
trafficking gang scenario and in the archival one, the negligent McCanns
are an absolute requirement.

2. Negligence and Maddie’s death

Negligence has had quite the attention lately.

And because it is walloping the McCanns it is getting a lot of support.

We
think people should stop for a minute to think before applauding
negligence the way they are. Just ask themselves how negligence fits in
with Maddie’s death involving her parents.

Negligence and
Maddie’s death are olive oil and water, no matter how hard or how long
you swirl them together they will never mix up.

The only scenario for both negligence and death to fit together somehow, and please do take note of the somehow, is the sedation one.

To
newcomers, the sedation scenario would be the McCanns having overdosed
Maddie with sleeping inducing drugs to go on a binge and the whole hoax
would be to hide that fact from authorities.

Notwithstanding that
if this group was as powerful as some say they are, it would never
allow for an autopsy to take place and if it did the results would be
stifled.

One has to wonder how blood fits in such a scenario, as the
only plausible explanation would involve the unblocking of Maddie’s air
ways and for that to have been, the parents or whomever, would have to
have been present while she was suffocating, otherwise why unblock the
air ways?

If they were present at the time of her death, then negligence wasn’t happening.

Plus, an overdose in sedation, as far as we know, does not cause suffocation.

But
even if it did, and please remember that this exercise is to try and
join up negligence with death by sedation, then it would mean that they
would have gone to dinner negligently and upon their return they would have
encountered Maddie suffocating and rushed to help her, only a minute
too late.

But for that to have happened, it would mean the dinner
– otherwise when did they abandon the kids? – had to be quick and early
because for the alarm to be given at around 10 pm, it means returning,
seeing an asphyxiating Maddie, trying to help her by freeing up the
airways that would justify the blood spatters, realise and come to terms
that she was dead, decide on the hoax, clean up the apartment and go
back and pretend dining (again?) and raise the alarm to have been done
before that time.

Is this minimally realistic? Even if it was,
which it isn’t, there’s the problem that Tapas staff said the group
was at Tapas as of 20:30 and stayed there until the alarm.

And on
the other nights the group is said to have stayed there until around
midnight, so why return earlier to apartments on Thursday?

So, when did they neglect the kids that night so the sedation scenario would be possible? It isn’t.

Negligence
and sedation seem, on a first look to fit, but upon analysis they
don’t. Thus we’re asking readers to note that somehow just now.

In reality, there’s no scenario that makes negligence fit together with the McCanns being involved in her death.

Independent of how the reader thinks Maddie died and of who killed her, by accident or not, the blood in the apartment states that someone, the person or people who killed her, by accident or not, was or were present.

Even if blood came from unblocking the air ways, that means someone was there.

If the reader believes, as we do, that the blood found in the apartment is from Maddie at the time of her death and believes as we do that the McCanns and/or one or more of the remainder T7 were present when she died, then that same blood rules out negligence completely.

The more people pursue the alleged fact that the McCanns were negligent the more they are distancing them from her death.

Very simple, and very straightforward.

3. Death and Maddie

Does the reader remember the good old days when the word ‘death’ was associated with Maddie in the British media?

Oh, wait, it was less than a month ago!

Fascinating how the connection between ‘death’ and the McCanns has almost gone with the wind so quickly.

The reader may think it’s because they are trying to put it behind them.

However if the reader thinks the association of the word death with the McCanns is the end of them please think again.

Maddie’s death is to be an integral part of both the European human trafficking gang scenario and in the archival one.

Only
by including that fact, that Maddie is dead, will the dog alerts be
‘explained’, as well as giving reason for Andy Redwood when he said that
there was every reason to believe that Maddie never left the apartment
alive.

Until recently, and we were even asked that question by a reader, we wouldn’t mind if negligence was the option taken.

We
then answered the reader that if that meant having the players sitting at
the table and finally playing, the game openly, then we would welcome
that or any other option.

We said that based on one simple fact,
and that was that we were living in a society where facts were facts.
But recently, we have witnessed that it is not so at all. And we’re not
even being political.

The Ben Needham case has shown us that fact can be created and used to slap our face with it as the official reality.

It
matters not if something happened, what only matters is if the due
authorities pronounce it happened, because if they do that, then it has
happened even if it hasn’t.

And that has even happened in the Maddie case.

One just has to remember Crèche Dad who is a man authorities say he was there and then, and even though we all know he wasn’t, officially he was and that means that him being there and then was from that moment reality even though it wasn’t.

Back to death, how will they fit Maddie’s death into their desired narrative?

If
one reads our post “Third Option” which is basically a prediction of
what the other side is currently trying to pull off, Maddie’s death is a
part of it very clearly.

Or, to sum up, the McCanns were
negligent and left the kids, along came the evil men who killed Maddie
inside the apartment and took her body away.

In that post we debunked it.

Only
problem with that debunking is that we used reason. We showed very
clearly that there was no time for the cadaver scent to develop and that
it would be impossible to explain the scent in the Scenic.

But Ben Needham’s toy car has shown all of us how the impossible is just the possible yet to be invented.

A
car found half a mile from the farmhouse, by bulldozers and with no
media noticing that it had been found even though they were right there,
is sufficient evidence to allow the police to come to the firm
conclusion that Ben died by an accident near the farmhouse.

Either
the toy car had some sort of tape recording device that we are unaware
of, we cannot see how such conclusions could be reached from such an
object.

And maybe because we are not alone in questioning this, it explains why South Yorkshire Police has since not detailed how it
came to such a conclusion.

They just said it was, and we are all expected to nod our heads, accept it was and move on.

In
the Maddie case, Operation Grange can use the exact the same shameless
brazenness and just tell us what we said above, that the McCanns were
negligent and left the kids, along came the evil men who killed Maddie
inside the apartment and took her body away, and then tell us to move
on.

We have already seen that the cadaver scent was left out of the Daily Mail article that mentioned only the blood alerts.

And then dismissed said alerts as possibly not being from human blood.

That
will be the first tactic to pull off Maddie’s death, just say Maddie is
dead and not explain why that conclusion was reached.

Never mention, the cadaver scent.

The blood, as shown, can be easily explained both in apartment and in the vehicle.

About the death scent, any question will be ignored and if this is the option officially taken, no media will dare speak of it.

We on the internet will shout and holler but will be ignored.

It will be left to people like Insane, to justify that all is due to contamination.

That
Maddie died in the apartment, killed by the European human trafficking
gang and not by the evil McCanns who were drinking their hearts away at
Tapas, and by misfortune Kate’s clothes were contaminated and that in turn
contaminated the closet, the shrubbery in the backyard and evidently the
Renault Scenic.

But, as we said, the idea is to ignore cadaver scent. As per, we will see later, the Jodie Marsh incident.

And
to those thinking that is simply not possible, let us remind them that
we have already seen the following: blood being non-human blood, Mr Smith
not wearing glasses and Ben’s toy car.

When there’s a will
there’s a way, and these days when there’s that will, then the way, even
if illogical, unreasonable or just a big huge lie, will be truth.

Keela can be made out to be useless and Eddie will ‘only’ serve to confirm that Maddie never left the apartment alive.

Notice, the dogs will be used in the narrative, their findings completely distorted.

Why
would any human trafficking gang take a dead child with two live ones
to take, is something the narrative will find a solution to, and if it
doesn’t, it will be made sure such inconvenient questions are simply not
asked in the media and are to be ignored on the internet.

4. The other side’s tactics and objectives

Negligence
only significantly benefits the government in the truth scenario but is
absolutely essential for the patsy and archival ones, those pursued by
the other side.

So negligence is their main effort in pressuring the government into going their way.

But the other side is acting on various fronts, or vectors, and not only on that.

Fortunately, and this went unnoticed, we had someone write the “Other Side’s Manual” and this happened in… Australia.

We think it happened there as if to test the waters far away from the UK.

The
author is the first to recognise that she has a connection in the case:
“And I speak with more than a passing interest in this case. I was a
reporter in London when the story broke and my son was the same age as
Maddie”

A journalist in the centre of the 2007 storm as it happened. Storm, as in the media playing games with all of us then.

Let’s then use quotes from this article to exemplify exactly what the other side intends to achieve.

Vector #1 – Promote neglect

“She
disappeared and the guilt and the blame game began for them. There is
no doubt they were remiss in leaving her alone — even Gerry said it was a
mistake.

(…)

The couple are emotionally paralysed not
only by her disappearance but by their consciences, never shaking off
the sick feeling that they were not there when Maddie needed them. And
the public has never let them forget it.

(…)

They left the child alone, a mother who didn’t know them screamed in my face during a round of interviews.“What
did they expect?”, was the frequent, illogical and cruel retort. Any
working class parents would be hauled upon child abandonment charges,
was the repeat argument.””

We will evidently come back to this
but we would like readers to retain for now this last phrase: “Any
working class parents would be hauled upon child abandonment charges,
was the repeat argument”.

It’s a very important sentence.

Vector #2 – Assume death

“None
of it is going to bring Maddie back. Only the perpetrators know where
her body is, who took her, where they took her. And why.”

We have
already handled this but please note how vague it is by saying it was
“perpetrators”, makes it suitable for it to have been the infamous
European human trafficking gang and distances death from parents.

Assume death but stay as far as possible away from detailing it in any way.

Anything linking the parents to that is strictly forbidden, as it is to be the European human trafficking gang.

Vector #3 – Make McCanns fade away

“But it’s time for the McCanns to turn off the legal tap and focus on the family life they have left.

(…)

It’s time for Gerry and Kate, trapped on a grief and reputation treadmill, to change focus.Time to get busy living, ditch the reputation management and let the chips fall where they will.Time to give Maddie’s siblings Amelie and Sean, now 11, the best of what childhood years they have left before they are adults.Kate
revealed that, despite not growing up with her, these siblings remember
their older sister and “want her back”. It is gut-wrenching.

(…)

The
McCanns should see that pursuing a legal battle serves no other purpose
than to provide notoriety and invaluable publicity to the people they
are trying to silence.Of course I am not saying they should give
up hope but maybe the time has come to turn the page on this chapter.
There are other children in this family who are victims in their own
right.Surely they have some right to fade into the background
and find some kind of a normal life away from the glare of scandal and
innuendo.”

The article speaks for itself.

Vector #4 – Discredit Portugal

“This
week the former Portuguese detective, who led the initial and
highly-criticised probe into the little girl’s disappearance, was back
on the controversy gravy train with more sensational claims.The
McCanns faked the abduction, according to Goncalo Amaral, to cover up
the death of their eldest daughter in their holiday flat in Praia da Luz
in the country’s south.”

Dismisses Mr Amaral’s claims by saying that he’s just on a gravy train.

To
the above, please add “The McCanns should see that pursuing a legal
battle serves no other purpose than to provide notoriety and invaluable
publicity to the people they are trying to silence”

Mr Amaral,
says the article, is just a greedy notoriety seeker and the McCanns are
helping by giving him free and “invaluable publicity”.

In this
vector frivolity is included with which the Supreme Justice Court
was accused, as reported by the Daily Mail, by the McCann legal team.

Such
an accusation, however groundless it is, makes the Portuguese justice
system flawed and biased before the eyes of the British public.

It explicitly claims that a decision from the Portuguese Supreme
Justice Court can be frivolous and it implicitly says that it may have
done so in the past. Or, in other words, its decisions are not to be
trusted, or at least, given with a significant amount of error.

This has 2 objectives.

On
one hand, pass the image that the McCanns are being persecuted by an
obsessive cop helped by a morally corrupt third world justice system and
on the other give a reason, and make it be quite understandable to its
citizens, as to why the UK has come to protect 2 of its citizens.

Did
the Portuguese say the McCanns were not cleared? Well, it would be
expected wouldn’t it? And even, look people, the resentful Portuguese
wanting so much to charge the McCanns with anything concerning Maddie’s
life, were they able to? No, of course not. Of course they weren’t able
because no matter how hard they tried, and they did, they couldn’t
undermine the unshakable innocence of the couple could they?

So,
they will say, it must be concluded that it’s absolutely ludicrous to
even think the McCanns are involved in any way in her death.

About
them leaving her and her siblings all alone, well, that’s completely
different story… but don’t worry, we are dealing with that.

Vector #5 – Discredit truth-seekers

“There
isn’t a single clue as to whether she is alive today but the lucrative
whodunit industry dogging her parents Gerry and Kate, who deny any part
in her death, rumbles on.

(…)

There was unprecedented vitriol from
armchair critics for these two “uppity” middle class GP parents who
“thought they knew better than anyone else”, I was told.

(…)

The
only “winners” here are lawyers and so-called authors still making a
buck from the blonde preschooler with the signature blemish on the blue
iris of her right eye.”

This is a very complex vector, the most
difficult to understand and the most brilliantly played by the other
side, as they are also throwing into the bonfire those they are using to
help make neglect sink in.

In this vector, one must include the
articles about Apartment 5A, rehashing the Ghoul Tours but now adding
that people – we would really love to know who – have offered money to
visit the apartment.

a. Apartment 5A and Ghoul Tours

The
blog promoting these tours is again named to facilitate it being
searched and, as we showed in our post “The messages”, it is to make
people go and look and, due to its politeness and apparently good
research, find out that the internet (as the blog is then supposed to
represent all of us) agrees that there was indeed an abduction and in no
way were the parents involved in Maddie’s disappearance.

But the main point of these articles is that those interested in wanting to know what happened are morbid and ghoulish people.

b. Katie Hopkins

Then
here we have the current wave of people in the media supposedly
promoting truth, or to be clear, really letting the McCanns have it.

We
are thinking of the following names and listing them by chronological
order: Katie Hopkins, Mark Williams-Thomas, Jodie Marsh and Shannon
Mathews

Ms Hopkins after it being called to her attention,
doesn’t tweet anything similar to the McCanns being involved in Maddie’s
death nor in the following cover-up as per Mr Amaral’s claims.

And, by the way, not a word to recommend his book.

She
only likes to perpetuate how badly negligent the McCanns are. And how
many people are reading her. As if Maddie had a voice she would say, I’m
gone because and just because my evil mummy and daddy abandoned me.

And she has reached millions.

Millions of people who are now, thanks to her, convinced Maddie was left alone and we will never know what happened to her.

Because we think that when she says that we are close to knowing what happened to Maddie, she’s just referring to all are soon to discover is that what happened was that Maddie was left alone and because of that suffered the fate she did.

A supposed reality that has supposedly been hidden from the public until now: officially the parents are indeed responsible because they were, wait for it, neglectful.

That supposed truth, let’s be frank, was never voiced until now. Up until now, the McCanns were said to have been responsible parents who took an understandable decision that turned out to be tragic, so saying now, openly and officially, that instead they were neglectful is quite, officially, the novelty.

c. Mark Williams-Thomas

Then
we had Mark Williams-Thomas selling a theory on ITV – certainly by
coincidence, NOT – that isn’t even his, but published by Danny Collins
in 2008, before the files were released, in his book “Vanished”.

A
theory whereby Maddie, the 4 yr old wonder-girl, who was able to know
not only that her parents were in the Tapas esplanade, as to know where
that esplanade was and how to get there from the apartment.

At
least the original theory, the one from Danny Collins, although
ridiculous had the decency to stop at Maddie wandering off into the
street looking for her parents without knowing where they were, and was
probably taken by gypsies. He even made some inquiries about gypsy
camps.

Interesting to know that Mark Williams-Thomas has evolved in thought about what happened to Maddie.

“Mark
Williams-Thomas, a former detective and child protection expert, said
the two most likely scenarios are that Madeleine was killed by accident
and her death was covered up or that she was abducted.”

We would really like to know what was it that has made him change his mind from his “two most likely scenarios.”

People
called out Mark Williams-Thomas’ bluff on his theory, thinking that
they had accomplished their mission, not realising that it was never
about making that theory credible but to further ingrain the premise in
which it is based on: negligence.

Out came the McCanns allegedly
baffled with this 9 year old new astonishing theory, which Kate already
has commented on her book and Clarence Mitchell has acknowledged the
McCanns were given manuscripts of Collins book (interesting they forgot
to mention now they had read this theory somewhere before) contradicting
the theory but not denying they left the children alone, thus
confirming the neglect. Yes, we left the kids alone but in no way could
Maddie wander off as there were 2 gates…

We think Jodie Marsh was a typical case in which a friend of a friend is not necessarily a friend.

We
think she came into the picture because she picked up from Katie
Hopkins and so was welcomed and given visibility by the other side.

We
say this because she wasn’t properly indoctrinated, it seems. At 6:34 pm she was one of the team but at 6:36 stopped being because she wandered off into cadaver odour territory and she shouldn’t have:

“Kerry
Needham, 44, whose son Ben went missing in 1991, hit back at Jodie
explaining why she believes the McCanns’ are right to clear their
names.”

The article in the paper edition of the magazine:

“Kerry Needham, 44, whose son Ben went missing in 1991 backs the McCanns’ bid to clear their names.She says:

“Jodie Marsh has no idea how she would react to this situation - she’s not the mother of a missing child.Nobody
has a clue what they’d do until they’re thrown into a situation where
they’re living daily with the nightmare of having a child go missing.Of
course, anyone - including myself - would be digging the dirt with our
bare hands if we thought it would find our child, but I’d also be
fighting to clear my name against any false accusations.Gerry and Kate have every right to ensure they keep their reputations intact.Their
other kids will read these reports and may very well ask why their
parents don’t defend themselves if they didn’t do so. I’ve been very
lucky with the support I’ve had and only receive the odd negative
comments, but even those few remarks devastated me.The McCanns have had to fight to beat off critics from every direction, which is horrific.They’re
in a no-win situation-if they ignore such accusations, people will say
they aren’t fighting them because it’s true. On the flip side, when they
fight back some people say it’s because they have something to hide.I
know what it’s like living with the pain of wondering whether you will
see your child again-every day is a battle. Jodie doesn’t have the right
to judge.””

Do note that the right clearance of name comes in the sub-heading. In bold.

One has to wonder where Maddie and Ben are in all this as it all seems to be only about the adults.

This article isn’t about missing children but reputational damage.

Kerry
Needham comes in defense of the McCanns against Jodie Marsh but lets
Katie Hopkins boast about the millions she has reached dissing them.

Jodie has no right to judge but apparently for Kerry Needham Katie Hopkins does.

The difference? One, Jodie, speaks about cadaver odour and the other, Katie, doesn’t.

One,
Jodie, reaches via Twitter hundreds of thousands but is less
threatening than the other, Katie, who reaches millions via Twitter,
Daily Mail and radio show

One, Jodie, had to be stopped, the other, Katie, is allowed to continue uncontested.

We have told readers that we think that the Ben Needham case is interlinked with the Maddie one, and this seems to be evident.

e. Karen Matthews

Lastly we had Karen Mathews.

This seems to be a good thing as it seems to compromise the McCanns.

What
people are not, in our opinion, realising is that by using the Shannon Matthews case the other side is turning the spotlight on the McCanns with a slight nuance,
also to their friends, the other T7. And by containing things to this
group, leaving all others out.

First, let’s be very clear. Between the 2 cases, there’s only 1 thing in common: abduction. That’s it.

Saying they share ‘staged abduction’ is false.

It’s
like comparing Inspector Calls with Hamlet just because they are both plays.
The only thing both these plays share is they are performed on a stage,
all else is different.

Just like between Shannon Matthews and Maddie McCann all outside the word abduction is different.

One
was planned, a conspiracy, the other was a reaction, a cover-up. That
alone separates totally the waters between the two cases.

But the other bigger difference is the social status of those involved.

When
one refers to ‘others’ being involved in the Shannon case, can it be
minimally compared with the ‘others’ involved in the Maddie case?

We
don’t think it can. We don’t know who the ‘others’ may be in the
Shannon case but we are willing to bet anything that they aren’t staff
of a tourist resort, a staff of a tour operator, a community
of local ex-pats nor the police, government, media and judicial system
of a nation.

The ‘others’ in the Shannon case, are more than likely to be her pals.

By
pointing the finger at these ‘others’ while accusing the McCanns of
neglect, it’s just being made clear that it’s intended that things are
to go no further than the T7, the McCann peers in neglect.

f. Discrediting Hopkins, Williams-Thomas, Marsh and Matthews

But what we want to point out is the calibre of the people involved in pushing the message of neglect.

They are being used but one of their use is their ‘unpleasantness’, in the lack of a better word.

Katie
Hopkins is like using a gnarling Rottweiler to convince people that
dogs are cuddly, Mark Williams-Thomas is as laughable as is theory and
Karen Matthews a convicted woman of a crime against her own daughter.

As
we said, we think Jodie got involved by accident but with all due
respect to the woman, her followers are more interested in seeing either
parts of her body or what clothes she’s wearing to cover it.

To
counter-balance this, we have Kerry Needham, an altruistic Kate McCann
in the Missing People Choir and helping a Missing People marathon runner
and Gerry McCann wanting to save £60 million in the struggling NHS.

By then ‘allowing it’, we now
realise, the Daily Mail seized the leadership in what appears to be an
anti-McCann campaign that we now know to be something other than that.

If until that article things had to be said by reading between the lines, since then thrashing the McCanns became more overt.

But
with the Supreme Justice Court ruling, the time to read between the
lines is definitely over as it took carpet from right under the feet of
the ‘innocent-look’.

It’s a reality that the issue is still under
contest but as we have explained, it’s not only flimsy but is as
useful as jumping off a plane tied to an anchor instead of a parachute.

But
legally, the Supreme Justice Court decision was halted and the McCanns
retain, for now, their ‘innocent-look’ and as we have seen, Kerry
Needham has come out to defend that what the McCanns are doing is
rightfully clearing their name.

So in theory, the McCanns retain their legal basis of having been cleared to sue, even though even they know it won’t last long.

The
other side started this vector by immediately ‘warning’ that anyone
publishing Mr Amaral’s book would be sued and making sure that we all
knew that they had the vicious Carter-Ruck on a short leash.

That was before the content of the Supreme Justice Court was known.

Since then we have seen death and covering-up of her death associated with the McCanns without them reacting.

We
know that death serves the narrative pursued and the cover-up thing can
be dealt with, outside the courts by discrediting Mr Amaral, the
Portuguese Supreme Justice Court and the entire Portuguese judicial
system.

So, to allege, that one is afraid to speak because of
legal implications is one big red-flag because to speak badly about the
McCanns is exactly what is intended, short of providing any sort of
evidence that links the McCanns to Maddie’s death.

Associating death with the McCanns only on the internet if you please, where that has already happened
for years and where for years it has been duly ignored.

And there’s no better way to convey that this fear is real than by stating that one has been a victim of this threat:

Another
way to make people feel real this fear is to have Mark Williams-Thomas
and ITV's This Morning hosts repeatedly say that they all are bound
legally to not speak any further.

Another
way to make people feel real this fear of legal threat is to have Mark
Williams-Thomas and ITV’s This Morning hosts repeatedly say that they
all are bound legally to not speak any further.

Slightly
off-topic but still within legalities, we hope the reader has noticed
that in the Closer article, the one where Kerry Needham appears to
defend the McCanns specifically against Jodie Marsh and no other, that
the magazine does not say a word about having, we imagine, exercised
censorship against Jodie Marsh

We say we imagine because we are
deducing the national magazine that Jodie says that has pulled unexpectedly her intended
article to be the magazine Closer as it’s there she writes.

She probably
thought that anything she would say would be published and probably decided to
refer to the cadaver odour in the article she wrote thinking it would, and we know it would, further bash the McCanns, and
it got, evidently pulled by the magazine.

If the article had been
pulled for reasons of external pressure, we would expect that the
magazine would say something like, our legal department advised
us not to publish latest article by Jodie, but says nothing.

That’s
self-censorship, the most hypocritical kind of censorship, the complicit
kind, especially when it involves justice for a little British girl.

6. Upstanding citizens

The other vector the article Louise Roberts’ article doesn’t mention, is of course, the regaining of the ‘innocent –look’.

We have spoken extensively on how this was done on our post last week “The complaint”.

But
we are not listing it here only because we have listed all others but
because this week there was a slight nuance, the making of the McCanns examples
of citizenship.

We had Kate and her Missing People Choir
participation in Britain’s Got Talent, and her helping raise the
staggering amount of £2,000 for an unknown marathon runner for Missing
People as well.

We said, and do maintain, that this was to make
Kate seem busy with worthy popular causes until when the next
fiscal year starts in May.

But now they have come up with the Professor McCann, the NHS wonder-doctor.

“Thousands of patients could unnecessarily be having surgery due to an inaccurate test, a heart doctor has warned.And needless operations performed because of the exam may be costing the NHS £60 million a year, says Professor Gerry McCann.The
cardiologist, father of Madeleine who has been missing since May 2007,
led a team of researchers from the University of Leicester.

(…)

Professor McCann plans to search for a more accurate way of deciding which patients with AS should undergo surgery.”

We placed as a comment in our last week’s post a Facebook post from Marian Greaves about this subject in which she says:

“So
delving even deeper, I did eventually find the research paper which was
published 13th Feb 2017. However it threw up lots of interesting facts,
it was based on a two year study as part of his fellowship. Now
fellowships are post-doctoral research grants to become a professor, you
undertake research supervised by other eminent academics and then
present it in a lecture to gain a professor post. This is exactly what
this piece of work was for, he didn’t lead it, he was tagged on the end
of 21 other leading academics in the field to assist with the research
for experience. There was no remit in the abstract or the study or
conclusion to look at costings to the NHS of doing unnecessary surgery.
Those permutations came from Gerry on his blog on the Uni site where he
did two statements as press release on the study.”

Gerry doesn’t exactly have a leading role in this, does he?

We
can only imagine how happy fellow academics felt when they saw his name
all over national news as being the leader and future reference for
this research.

When we went to school these people had a name but will refrain from saying it here.

This obviously puts pressure on the government to not make a move against the McCanns in times in which the NHS is struggling financially.

What
should be understood is that this is also done to contrast with the likes of
Katie Hopkins, Mark Williams-Thomas, Jodie Marsh and Karen Matthews.

Repeating
ourselves, the idea being to accept that the McCanns were indeed
neglectful but one has to look at the kind of people who seem to be
bothered with a mistake made by otherwise upstanding citizens.

This allows for the McCanns, in their faded away life, to not be social pariahs.

7. Verb ‘to take’

If
one really wants to point the finger at the McCanns there are many
ways to go about that without having to say explicitly that Maddie was
not abducted, one just has, for example, to quote Mr Amaral.

Or use the ‘vanished’ or ‘disappeared’ used by the MSM even before the Katie Hopkins article of a year ago.

And never, under any circumstance and for obvious reasons, imply there was an abduction.

The
verb taken is to be used only when used together with the word body, as
in where was the body taken, or in who took the body. And evidently, in
this last instance, when not implying it was by a European human
trafficking gang who did it.

To stop the lie that there was an
abduction is the reason why Mr Amaral has suffered all these years, so
to support that lie is then to totally disrespect the man and all he
went through.

One must not forget that whatever is written is not
for those who are familiar with the case but for those who will fall
for the blood not being human and that Mr Smith was not wearing glasses.

These
people do not have any capability to read between lines. When Kate Hopkins
says that we will never know what happened to Maddie they will take her
for her word.

We
then said “What is it ? holding a group of Doctors who have let
themselves be villified for neglect when in fact neglect did not take
place.”

Few will remember the criticism we suffered for making such a statement.

The
McCanns could not have been not neglectful because the Tapas staff said
they had been there, and as they were part of the good guys they could
not be questioned. The McCanns had been neglectful, full stop.

By
the way, in that post we only involved Dianne Webster and Russel
O’Brien, so well contained within the T9 as then, not even we suspected
that anyone present outside the T9 could have been involved.

But
people ridiculed us because even though we may have been right about that
night, there were all the other nights when the T9 had been neglectful,
so what we said was to be ignored.

But the real heavy fire upon
us came when 9 months later, and still completely alone on the
negligence debunking front we wrote the post “In an Emergency call 112, when in a HOAX call 211” in which we questioned and debunked the
existence of the Big Round Table.

By showing that such a table
never existed, we were clearly saying that there had been no Tapas
dinners, which meant the staff was complicit (or, to be precise, others
besides the T9 were involved in the hoax) and so there had been no
negligence, at least by them abandoning the kids while at Tapas.

Then, the possibility was raised of them having abandoned the kids at the
apartment (false) while they had dined at Chaplin’s near the Church
(true).

This meant over-egging negligence as such gross felony could not be passed as being within ‘responsible parenting’.

Just
to clarify, we, in the blog believe that the T9 did have dinner at
Chaplin’s and other restaurants that week and that the kids were looked
after in one of the building 5 apartments. But, as we will stress later
that now is not the time to push personal theories, we fully accept that
others disagree totally with us.

What we want to highlight is that in 2010, when we implied that the McCanns had not been negligent, all hell descended upon us.

We
got hit really hard, and I, Textusa, in particular, saw myself
immediately ostracised and made to feel like a pariah within the “Maddie
world”.

And that was done by the people claiming to know the PJ Files extensively. And they did know them.

Between
March 2011 and October 2011 we wrote 12 posts where we debunked as
phoney the documents known as the Tapas Booking Sheets, showing, quite
clearly, we think, that the Tapas dinners were as much a hoax as the
abduction. And that clearly showed there had been no negligence.

As the pariahs we were considered, we continued alone on the non-negligence front.

4
years had passed since Maddie was abducted, and the sole voice
debunking negligence was smothered by those saying they were pursuing
the truth.

We are not playing the victim and we are not calling
these people hypocrites. The negligence was so well ingrained that they
resisted anything that went against it.

That’s what we want to highlight. It is very hard to take away negligence once it has settled in.

And we also want to highlight how the PJ Files help promote and perpetuate the negligence hoax.

Because
the people we have mentioned above, were both familiar with the files
and we think genuinely wanted to find the truth about what happened to
Maddie.

For one to understand that there was no negligence one has to read attentively the PJ Files.

Lose time with them. Cross-reference statements with statements, documents with documents and statements with documents.

That is something that a layperson will not do. Nor is it reasonable to expect they will.

To a beginner, who will evidently go first to the statements of the T9, negligence is there.

The T9 in their statements confess to negligence and the Ocean Club staff confirm it.

Hope reader now understands how they have turned the files against us.

Yes, the dogs are in the files and are damning to the McCanns but to find that out means reading the files.

9. The McCann trial

And all this takes us to the McCann trial. The one that is going on.

If one is to ask anyone if they think the McCanns are guilty, they will say, hell yes!

Of what? Of abandoning their children every night to go out and get drunk, they will say without hesitation.

Ask
the same everyone what is it that angers them the most about the McCann
case, and they will say, the fact that the parents got away with it.

Got
away with what? With abandoning their children every night to go out
and get drunk, with again, not the slightest hesitation.

It is
sad, but true to say, that people are not looking for justice, they just
want the McCanns to be punished and be punished for neglect.

They
do think that the parents are involved in Maddie’s death but they
won’t provide an opinion about that because they feel they don’t know
enough it.

However, there’s one thing they are certain of, there’s one
thing they do feel they know enough about and are not afraid to express their
opinion on, and that is the McCanns were negligent and should be
punished.

So, why not punish them? Why not take them to court and satisfy the public on that and only on that?

So we are now having a popular court, in which the public is judge, jury and executioner.

For
the prosecution, Katie Hopkins, Mark Williams-Thomas, Jodie Marsh
(taken off the list due to ‘personal problems’ as in problems because
her mouth went too far) and Karen Matthews.

For the defense, Drs Kate McCann the choir singer and marathon fund-raiser and Gerry McCann the NHS money saver.

Kerry
Needham is a defense witness for another trial, that’s ongoing in real
courts, about whether the McCanns were formally cleared or not by the
Portuguese justice system.

A completely separate process and not to be confused with this popular tribunal.

The popular court is now assembled. The crowd jeers the pair in the dock.

Charges?

a) Were the McCanns neglectful on the night of May 3 2007 in Praia da Luz?

b) If proven guilty of neglect, is that the main reason for the minor Madeleine Beth McCann to have been taken from the apartment?

Guilty, chants the crowd! Guilty! Guilty!

No one wants to hear that one should at least hear the defendants… they’re guilty, they’re guilty, shouts the mob.

That’s what we are reading in the comments on newspaper articles and on the various Facebook groups and forums.

The
pitchforks have been handed out, the gallows are getting the final
hammering as we speak and even the refreshment stands are struggling to
supply the ever increasing demand.

We will ignore the more
vitriolic comments but would like to highlight those like “I dislike
profoundly the woman but agree 100% with her”, “Who would have thought I
would ever agree with her, but I do, she’s absolutely spot on” and
“Finally, someone who has the courage to speaking the truth!”.

Only it’s not the truth.

To associate courage to the spreading of untruths, seems to us hardly appropriate.

And
we, of all people, know how hard it is to unconvince someone who has
been convinced of neglect and is now filled with satisfaction on
witnessing the McCanns finally getting it.

To expect
people who believe that the blood signalled by Keela is not human and
that Mr Smith wasn’t wearing glasses to not take neglect at face value,
is unrealistic.

But to believe they will do is very much being a realist. And the whole point of this exercise.

This
way, the other side can turn to the government and say, see, the people
are now quenching their thirst in seeing the McCanns punished, so now
is the ideal time to blame it all on them to have given a window of
opportunity for Maddie to have been killed in apartment and her body
taken by that infamous but illusive European human trafficking gang.

In
their defense they will say that if one looks at things properly, the
McCanns and the T9 will have been punished and the British elite will
remain protected and unharmed.

The only victims will be Mr
Amaral, who is Portuguese and nowhere near being part of its elite, so
is an understandable and acceptable casualty and Brenda Leyland who can
be considered a collateral victim.

10. The government

One
must recognise that to react to the Supreme Justice Court ruling with
discrediting Mr Amaral, with discrediting the Portuguese Supreme Justice
Court, with discrediting all those that seek the truth by calling them
greedy and/or morbid, with discrediting to their own benefit those who
they are using to promote neglect, with reinstating legal fear, with
ensuring that the McCanns stop being in the public’s eye, with promoting
neglect not only by turning the PJ Files against us but fundamentally by creating a mob and have it release all their vitriol and anger against the couple and so create a false sensation of achievement of
justice while safeguarding that the McCanns continue socially protected
and with accepting death to allow for a Ben Needham finish by pinning it
on an European human trafficking gang is pretty remarkable and outstanding.

And all in under a month.

If it wasn’t for the Jodie Marsh incident, without a glitch.

Add
to this, the “Elvis & Operation Grange fan-club” corner of the internet has
finally spoken.

Not from the usual perch but like a cuckoo by using another
bird’s nest:

“As I've said many times before there is no such
evidence in the public domain and therefore no paper or broadcaster will
lay themselves open to damages and costs.”

The evidence in
question was about someone trying to claim “that the McCanns were
involved in some way with the death of the child then obviously they
will have to provide evidence that they are speaking the truth”.

The
person seems to say that the PJ Files, that are in the public domain,
have no evidence proving that the McCanns were involved in some way with
Maddie’s death.

We disagree. The majority of our posts are based on those PJ Files.

And,
we would say, so does Mr Amaral disagree, as he wrote a book based on
those files to claim that indeed the McCanns were involved in disposing
of Maddie’s body.

Taking into account that the last time we heard
from this corner of the internet, this pigeon had his chest all filled
up with air taunting the McCanns and saying all was going fine with
Operation Grange, this would be worrying, as it would reveal that the
government seemed to be walking the path laid out by the other side.

Fortunately, as far as we could ascertain, this character has long been cut off from the inner circle of those in-the-know.

We
believe his silence and his words above reflect the position of someone
who is waiting to see where the ball falls so he can say I told you so,
rather than someone in possession of true knowledge.

Like we said last week, we think the government and the other side haven’t reached an agreement.

We
say this based on thinking that if the government was on board with the
other side, there would be no need for the desperate move that was the
complaint, provoking a second and even clearer decision from the Supreme
Justice Court about the fact that the McCanns had never been cleared.

What
we think is happening is at this point in time is the government
playing like the PJ did when the Met was literally on its hands and
knees in Luz in 2015.

This time, the other side is SY, trying to convince the government.

It
has indeed paved the way for the government to decide on the European
human trafficking gang, as we hope to have shown clearly in this post,
but the decision, like it happened in Luz in 2015 with the PJ, is up to
the government to make.

Please, please note we are not saying we think government is on our side.

We
are saying that we think government is, like the PJ in Luz did with
SY, watching the other side on their hands and knees doing all the hard
work, arms crossed and with quite a tedious look.

We do hope,
that the government will do the same as the PJ did back in 2015 and that
was to tell SY to, as the Portuguese say, go comb monkeys.

We do have to say that bringing in the NHS and its financial difficulties into this issue seems to us quite a desperate move and quite an antagonising one. Not seeing this generating any sympathy from the government.

11. What can we do?

First thing is to understand what is going on and we hope to have helped with that with current post.

If
we are correct in our assessment, it means that a major effort is being
made to convince the government to decide for the “Third Option”, Ben
Needham style.

If it needs convincing, then it’s because it’s not convinced.

If
it’s not convinced what we can do is present our arguments, in a civil
manner, as to why it’s in the best interest of all to go for truth.

The first and most obvious is that only truth will put an end to this farce.

We
remind government that we lived between 2008 and 2011 without Operation Grange.
Government must realise that ending it on a farce will hardly mean we
all go home and call it a day.

Then we would like to say one word to the government: Hillsborough. It’s self-explanatory.

We
would also like to ask government if they have ever heard of the
Emperors who came before or after the Emperor made famous with the tale
“Emperor’s New Clothes”?

No, because no one has. Only that Emperor is ridiculed and will forever be the one to be ridiculed.

And
with Maddie if government insists in perpetuating the farce, a little
boy, somewhere, sometime will point to the Emperor and say “Look, he’s
naked!”.

Then, the media will rush back to look at all pictures
and find, hypocritically appearing surprised, to ‘discover’ that the Emperor
was always naked and the ridiculing campaign will begin, and
government, you will be that targeted Emperor.

And food for thought and establishing a parallel with the current situation, one has to ask, was it the Emperor who decided to walk around naked pretending he had clothes on, or was he advised by others that doing so was the best option? And who ended up being ridiculed, the Emperor or his advisors?

Also, in case
the Supreme Justice Court does not arrive in time, it will arrive and it
will confirm that the McCanns were never cleared.

About smearing
the Portuguese justice system, let us remind you that the smearing
campaign against the PJ – by repeatedly to the point of nausea calling
them blundering cops – did not work well in the past, did it?

Lastly, if we are calling it a farce it is because it is a farce.

If
one takes into account the following definition of farce “a comic
dramatic work using buffoonery and horseplay and typically including
crude characterization and ludicrously improbable situations” then it
only isn’t because it’s not comical.

And talking of credibility we do think that if the Maddie case continues
to be ‘farced up’, it will make worse the already existing credibility
crisis British policing is facing.

It
shows that the Met requires improvement. We don’t consider humiliating it
publicly before the entire globe as helping it in that.

And evidently we are not the
only ones calling it that, the entire world knows it’s a farce.

It’s
cringing making to speak about Maddie anywhere in the globe because of that and it’s up to the
British government decide whether this situation that shames the country continues
or if a full stop is put to it.

On a personal level, what we must do is show that we are not a mob.

That
we do not want the McCanns responsible for anything more, or less,
than what they are accountable for, and neglect is not a part of it.

That
we are not falling for the public crucifying of the couple and the
other side can take their rotten tomatoes back to where they got them.

We have the advantage of knowing the files with details, so let’s use that knowledge.

We would like to point out, again, that this is not the time to propagate personal theories.

As
the reader will see, we are not proposing that swinging is the reason
for the hoax. The time now is to unite around the fact that there was no
neglect.

Without neglect the truth that there was no abduction is outed.

So when one reads people writing mob-style comments, one should respond.

But
always with reason and never emotionally. Leave aside and condemn
personal comments about the couple. This is not about whether we like
them or not but about justice.

One should bring up the dogs, especially Eddie.

With
neglect, in this alternative fact world we live in, the dogs can be
ignored but take away neglect and there’s no way that can happen.

Readers can leave suggestions in comments which will be welcomed.

This way we can show government that we are here and not falling for the trap the other side has put in front of us.

12. Media

A very long post, so just a very short paragraph to the media.

We
see you continue to publish evident fake news. We will refrain, due to
decorum, to tell you where we last saw your credibility.

119 comments:

What if.. Hello Textusa Sisters the child suffered a serious injury she was sedated and left to sleep subsequently woke up her sibling found her behind the sofa 'Maddie, Maddie' crying for all that time for help the parents return fail to resuscitate and disaster!

A truly brilliant post Textusa as always. You have made the situation crystal clear to 2.5 million readers of your work . Madeleine did not die because she was neglected - she was not on her own when she died. I am confidant that Portugal will make sure to respond to the ``complaint`` very soon and then lets see what the fall out will be.

I believe the twins were in another appartment with other children watching videos and MBM was alone in 5A, possibly already deceased. The time line written by R. O'Brien says " Jerry 9:10 - 9.15 in tv room + all well"Then he writes " ? did he check". I take that to mean Jerry went to the tv room but there is a question as to whether Jerry checked the appartment where MBM was supposed to be.

Exactly, there was no neglect - I don't think any qualified doctors who have done a stint in A&E would be unaware of the dangers of leaving little children alone, even for a few minutes, especially in a strange place in a foreign country.As for "it was just like dining in your back garden ", he must think we would all be so stupid to believe that as we all have garden dining tables far removed from the house on the other side of a swimming pool and a public road with open access to an unlocked patio door.

Don't understand Mr Amaral believes Maddie dies in the apartment he also believes in neglect and she was alive up till the 3rd.I have read your posts always I am a armchair detective so I really don't know a lot only what I read so I cannot believe that Mr Amaral would not have leaked that the neglect was false,i also in my opinion that Maddy died in the bathroom read some where a long time ago a article about the bathroom Would not know where to find it now,Another thing I cannot understand is why Kerry Needam is all of a sudden on the Mccanns defence after all the search for her child has come to a end with a conclution I would not agree with I know Kerry knows more than she says so maybe she has been told let Bens case be put on the back burner until we have sorted out the McCann case.

TextusaYou have truly excelled yourself this time.A fascinating post that lays bare the lies and the cover ups.It is clear now, more than ever before , that there's a highly disciplined campaign to feed the negligent lie to the public.Whilst that, for the majority of those following this bizarre case is highly disconcerting, it is nevertheless, quite illuminating to see how they work, how clever they think they are and how stupid they view the public.Backed by MSM (and yes, good on you Textusa, for your admonition directed to them,) they have swung into full time "Let's play neglect, neglect neglect card", as a lie repeated often enough soon becomes the truth to many.No neglect=no abduction.So impressed with how you've linked the connectors together with clear explanations.

To be honest, I'm ashamed to be British.The lies and the cover ups, protecting the Establishment Élite, are innumerable, must protect, no matter what and in so doing, denying a little girl justice.What have we sunk to?What have we become ?Those who are corrupt, seeking to satisfy their own ends, lie so much and so often that it is becoming harder and harder to find any semblance of truth in the misty haze of lies.I pity those who are fooled by the media and the spin.These are the people who need to be made aware of the truth.

I admire your work greatly Textusa and also your unswerving pursuit for justice for a sad little girl who had no chance to live or have a voice of any kind!

Wonderful in the extreme. It's been a long , hard week of wondering what's indeed relevant and why ,for me, so heartfelt thanks for this brilliant post. Great advise too which I'm off to be most active in taking.Aileen Peebles

Who is orchestrating all of this Textusa?It is quite complicated to bring all of the media involved together to tow the party line and push home neglect. Are they all in on it together.Is the reputation management company still being paid by the McCanns to do it? I still don;t undertsand why the media is generally so compliant

Wonderful piece - couldn't agree more once you point it out - Thank you.

Given what you have outlined as being the current strategy (the negligence uprising and the files turned against us) is it now more important than ever to get something very solid and official from Portugal? - Once and for all and arguably for the first time since 2008 - would like to hear your views on this if possible?

Portugal's establishment, to most, seems quite publicly acquiescent over the past 9 years as regards defending it's reputation, the case, the evidence. (note .. publicly/officially) That is up until the recent report from the Supreme court, albeit too loose-ended. Do you think that without a strong statement or response - that is a fire-walled off to ambiguous debate, to press translation, liking to a bold listing of facts that clearly calls out what the parents are NOT cleared of - your insightful prediction as to the sorry fate of future, evidence based arguments against negligence will be facilitated more easily?

Think we really need to hear something firm from Portugal - sadly this is unlikely, Diplomatic relations don't operate like this in reality. Do you have thoughts on the impending Supreme court response, content or otherwise?

Thank you again Textusa,now ,once again we are waiting for a Portuguese Court decision ,but this is the one that will,"allow", hopefully,the tangled web of years and years of lies and cover-ups see the light of day !!!

Thank you for your enlightening posts Textusa I'm new to your blog, its all starting to make sense now. I am someone who doesn't normally comment and hasn't even got a Facebook account but since the article recently in the Daily Mail about mccanns 'not cleared' I have been reading everything I can, watching Richard D Halls documentaries, YouTube interview clips etc.I believe the majority of the UK public don't believe the Mccanns (body language, the things they repeat) but many like me have stayed silent. What I'm trying to say is there may be thousands or millions like me who have been silently witnessing, becoming knowledgeable who will not believe the "neglect, trafficking" theory that MSM will put out to close down this case, I just hope that the real truth comes out soon.

Mine and my husband's response to this ridiculous article in the Washington Post.

What stands out most about this short, and rather biased article, is the incessant use of the word 'trolls' to describe anyone that doesn't share the opinion that two people could indeed be responsible for the events that lead to their young daughter's death and the subsequent cover-up that followed. Whilst it's true that, to many, the thought of such an act can be deemed 'unthinkable' by most, that does not, in itself, set in stone (turned or un-turned) the unequivocal certainty that the act is impossible or improbable.

There has been insurmountable proof throughout time that we, as a species, are capable of anything, should a situation present us with unimaginable choices. To label a group of people - that have a genuine belief in an event such as this - 'trolls' is to purposely and arrogantly undermine their vested interest to see an end to this long and complicated journey. Not for the reasoning of wanting to see Kate and Gerry McCann brought to justice for the sake of frivolous satisfaction or some blind journey of spite and vengeance, but to see justice for a young girl that deserves peace and accountability.

The word 'trolls' has become synonymous throughout the internet to describe those that only wish to cause grievance and offense for the sake of their own 'jollies'. Though it is true that there are many people out there that carry this over-used term well, this is not the case for the largest percentage of the so-called anti-McCanns. In fact, there are those few on each side of the argument that could be called the same, but for some reason, it is only the people that have utter belief in Kate and Gerry's involvement that are slurred in such a dismissive and vulgar way.

So, let us get to the facts and the evidence. Firstly – and most importantly – these ‘trolls’ are not basing their theories on unsubstantiated opinions, without rhyme or reason. They are basing them on the official Portuguese Police files, that due to Portuguese law, “once a case is shelved or solved, must be released into the public domain”, which was indeed done in 2008, and is where all the factual information into the case is readily available.

Within these official files, one can read for themselves every statement that the McCanns and their friends made during the investigation and where one can clearly see the many inconsistencies within the aforementioned statements. One can also watch the video evidence of the highly trained British Police dogs that, in over 200 case searches, had never alerted to a false positive or been discredited in their findings, or professionally since. The dog handler’s statements are also accessible in the police files. Both the blood and cadaver alerts were only found – out of every apartment and car that was searched – with that of the McCanns. The most conclusive being that of Kate McCann’s clothing, Madeleine’s toy (cuddle cat) and a T-shirt belonging to one of the children. These were confirmed to be cadaver only alerts, as no blood was present. In reference to both cadaver and blood alerts, these were found behind the sofa in the McCann’s apartment and in a car hired by them three weeks after Madeleine’s disappearance.

According to John Lowe’s report, from the FSS in Birmingham, the blood alerts were deemed as inconclusive. Although he claims to have found 15 markers to Madeleine’s DNA (proving the blood dog absolutely correct), he then states that there are 37 components, which did seem to muddy the waters.

Although forensic science has not been entirely infallible in the past, this does not explain the cadaver dog’s findings. Someone definitely died in that apartment and the Portuguese investigation did a thorough background check on apartment 5A and it was concluded that no one had died there prior to the McCann’s arrival in Portugal. Without the DNA evidence to back the dogs and the McCanns (and friends) refusal to cooperate with the Portuguese investigation or partake in a reconstruction of the night’s events of May 3rd, having fled back to the UK, the Portuguese investigation had nowhere else to go and the case was shelved.

The McCanns – despite inaccurate belief – have never officially been cleared of involvement in their daughter’s disappearance, and there is serious doubt over there having ever been an ‘abduction’. To date, no evidence has ever been found to confirm this. If you read their own words, watch their own behavior and look at the evidence presented, there is definite cause for serious doubt as to their unaccountability in Madeleine’s disappearance, and if this makes me a ‘troll’, then so-be-it.

Be careful not to label people ‘trolls’, just because you do not agree with what they are saying. It is a knee-jerk reaction thrown carelessly out by those who only have a narrow-minded view. It also undermines the legitimacy and the qualifications of the people that use it. Take a moment to read the facts that are presented right in front of you.

To finish, as for people refusing to give you interviews, I can only assume that you have not spoken to some of the nicer and more eloquent minds that have looked into this case, but then with the litigious nature of the McCanns and the way journalists tend to twist people’s words, is it really any surprise. Especially when you consider these same journalists are themselves afraid, it seems, to print the facts that I have shared with you here today.

Textusa, thank you. Brilliant.Only truth will put an end to this farce.All this is about Justice.

ANONYMOUS 13:40 I read always the comments posted on TEXTUSA. I like very much yours.I agree with you. It is very touching when you say you are ashamed to be British.(I was also ashamed when internals criminals affairs (and others) sullied (sully)my country.)And I have been ashamed all these years with the Madeleine McCann "case" :because the numerous Prime Ministers of my country (and there was a lot since 2007) never did anything (à ma connaissance)in this WORLDWIDE affair. For me, reading your comment, I see a good and intelligent Britain as many others, wanting the truth. I wish Theresa May can read you and hear your feelings. We are WITH THE TRUTH and PROUD of it.I am proud of TEXTUSA. Yesterday I read again : "Ca suffit, Enough is enough." by TEXTUSA 13 APRIL 2009 that give me an idea.Merci encore, Textusa. A Citizen of the world.

I have no doubt that the McCanns' neglect is being deliberately emphasized by the recent media activity, but do doubt if anything other than the public belief in the abduction of a live child is the aim. To accept that Madeleine may "not have left the apartment alive" (I know Redwood did once touch on this) is to accept that Mr. Amarel and the P.J. were 50% correct in their findings (1.The minor Madeleine McCann died in 5G and (2) her parents simulated an abduction and hid her corpse.) With Mr. Amarel being allowed to comment on the case in the future, it would be foolish to have the public believe that there is ANY truth in anything he might say. Also, to accept her death at the hands of her abductors will lead people to speculate on how this may have happened. That inevitably leads to the only place blood was found - behind the sofa. How likely is it that intruders would kill a child behind a sofa? Once sofa is mentioned it is impossible to forget that cadaver odour was also found in this place. There was too much publicity of this at the time. The public will question how long she would have had lay there for this and whether abductors would really delay to clean up blood and choose leave with a dead child while two live ones were nearby? I don't think it will wash. I believe the pushing of neglect is to make us doubt the veracity of the parents regarding the frequency of checks on the children. "If they are so neglectful they probably left the kids unchecked for hours"- that I believe is the message we are meant to get. The conclusion will be that Madeleine was abducted, the dogs were "unreliable"(they probably wont be mentioned at all) and that any ongoing investigation is up to the Portuguese, while the British will retain a working relationship and file it under cold case, still open, pending further developments.

Ty Text for the share of that ridiculous Trolling piece in the Washington Post,showing us once again only us unbelievers are trolls.

Love your blog again this week,but I totally disagree as you know about the neglect not neglect debate,but unfortunately and I feel not been considered is the fact it's already out there and strongly believed,this being the catalyst for most people's outrage it must be said. So if Sy are going to use it they will and us debating the fact won't stop that.

There's,like abduction absolutely no evidence the children were babysat and not one resident of the ocean club saw children being moved day or night. For me people being sick dosen't prove babysitting the same as the Gasper statements don't prove paedophilia. Just my thoughts :-)

Dr Synott has been interested in the McCann trolling ever since he first saw it at work in about 2012.

He said: “It was somewhat organised, it was repetitive, but the volume of information was the real surprising thing.”

The University of Huddersfield researchers want pseudonyms which enable cyber trolling to be prevented from being used on Twitter.

Dr Synott said: “It is encouraging to see ministers have called the major social media platforms to Whitehall to demand they do more to protect people online from cyber bullying and trolling or face sanctions.

His study published in Computers in Human Behaviour has been featured in an editorial headed ‘The dark side of social media’ for the prestigious journal, Nature.

It reinforces newly-revealed UK Government plans to curb cyber abuse.

Dr Synott said: “We found there were between 100 and 150 abusive comments on Twitter, Facebook and McCann messageboards every day.”

Dr Synott is now planning to extend the research by analysing the pro McCann camp.

Hi Textusa,brilliant post and based on your observations.Alison Saunders(CPS)has meetings with PJ Authorities-No conclusion reached,but continue with Operation stGange-Defamation Trail? 2008,Mr Goncalo Amaral write the book,"Truth of the Lie" McCann's take Civil Action 2009.2010-11, David Cameron via Home Office set up Operation Grange,Remit Abduction?2017 31 January,Supreme Court Ruling,finds against the McCann Family,they launch an appeal February 2017,new PR Campaign begins,Clarence back in the picture.The UK Government another-"Hillsborough"moment,cannot seem to detach themselves from this case as they became embroiled in it at it's conception-why?The UK Government must have Covert Inteligence Officers implicated as part of this "Cover Up",which begs a question,what where they doing in Portugal 2007,Warner Leisure?February 2017,Sir Bernard Hogan Howe retires not solving the Madeleine McCann disappearance,he knows more than he has blurted out to LBC,"Murdered-er missing child"?

"In the present proceedings [autos], behaviours that are susceptible to be included in the crimes of homicide and of desecration of a corpse are being investigated as by the provisions of art.º 131º and 254º of the Penal Code.

Thus, it must be considered that there are indicia that consubstantiate a strong suspicion that, in the vehicle used by the MCCANNs, in there are, elements of proof (instrumental and direct) of the practice of the crimes investigated, of fundamental importance to the objectives of the inquiry.

Therefore, accepting the suggestion from the PJ, I authorize, under and in compliance with the provisions of artº 174º, 176º, 178º and 267º, all from the Penal Code, the search for seizure of objects and other elements of proof related to the object of these proceedings:

- in the vehicle Renault, model Scenic, with licence plate 59-DA-27"

Or, translating from the legalese, we are investigating possible homicide and possible profanation of body and is it's suspected that vehicle has evidence of that, it's authorised the seizure of vehicle to be searched.

In our opinion, it says nothing that's damning in any way to the McCanns, as it's a valid justification to have had the Scenic searched.

Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk They drugged Maddie just like Matthews did, left her in a room alone, like Matthews did. They're not innocent by any stretch. KD https://twitter.com/neverheardofher/status/838307792326914049 …00:43 - 5 Mar 2017

Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk Exactly because they're Dr's it ok they drugged & left daughter alone to get drunk. Someone on council estate wouldn't get away with it KDKaren Danczuk added:Sean Bhoy @sean_bhoy67 @KarenDanczuk if I done what they done I'd be hung drawn n quartered00:47 - 5 Mar 2017

Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk And how strange is that? She went away without a hairbrush or toothbrush but the others did? Her grandmother even said she'd been drugged KDKaren Danczuk added,jamie templey @jamietempley @tomlinsonrob1 @KarenDanczuk police found no hairbrush or toothbrush belonging to maddie that would have shown drugs in her system FACT01:02 - 5 Mar 2017

Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk Anyone who says McCanns are innocent, just remember they left 3 children under the age of 4 alone to go out. Either Way they have guilt! KD01:33 - 5 Mar 2017

Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk Money my friend. Anyone who tries to give an alternative view on it are gagged. KDKaren Danczuk added,Adam @adamuk17 @KarenDanczuk I don't know how they've got away with it for so long01:38 - 5 Mar 2017

Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk I'm not back tracking and why don't you prove to me she wasn't drugged? Prove me wrong? Why was there no DNA of her in apartment? KDKaren Danczuk added,Norman Thomson @TormodRuadh @KarenDanczuk you haven't backed up your previous statements. Backtracking and looking to draw a line under the conversation now.01:41 - 5 Mar 2017

Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk I am glad you have no contact with my boys. Your profession & you defend 2 parents who left 3 under fours alone to get drunk is worrying. KD https://twitter.com/neverheardofher/status/838321160207142912 …01:44 - 5 Mar 2017

Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk Yes you are, you're trying to prove she wasn't but can't prove me wrong - so thank you. I can't be proven wrong  KDKaren Danczuk added,Norman Thomson @TormodRuadh @KarenDanczuk You made the statements. I'm not trying to prove anything, only asking that you back up your claims. You haven't, thanks x01:59 - 5 Mar 2017

Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk I'm taking info that's in the public domain so I can't be. If I was the first to say this publicly without evidence I could be. KDKaren Danczuk added,Shelley bobs @NantwichGirl @KarenDanczuk Karen please be careful. The mcCanns are not adverse to suing people who say unsubstantiated things about them in the media.02:00 - 5 Mar 2017

Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk Just type McCann in the search on Twitter. Everything I've said and others is all over Twitter and online. KDKaren Danczuk added,Callie @carolinebhunt @jamietempley @tomlinsonrob1 @KarenDanczuk interesting, but where did you get this Information from?02:27 - 5 Mar 2017

Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk Maybe they should have all the "liable stuff" removed from online then. They could do that, then people wouldn't read it like me &comment KDKaren Danczuk added,lee williams @leedslee_lw @KarenDanczuk you have stated they drugged their daughter to go get drunk and said this was fact.. that is certainly libellous02:47 - 5 Mar 2017

Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk Not wanting to be harsh lovely, and I have to say, the ones who really suffer from parents mistakes are the children. Trust me I know. KDKaren Danczuk added,Karen Bleakley @bleakley_karen @KarenDanczuk aww Karen really sad you have taken such a harsh view they made a mistake and will have to live with that for rest of lives03:14 - 5 Mar 2017

Hi Textusa,aka Michael Walker @walkercan1000,still being funded from the"Find Madeleine Fund"on behalf of the Family,remember those photos of you and Gerry,with a phone,paddling in Prai Da Luis May 2007

It most certainly is known that "Gerry" did not "carry out the hour-long operation"!!! He is a cardiac diagnostician, not a surgeon of ANY sort. He is not a F.R.C.S. ( Fellow Of The Royal College Of Surgeons)

Savior 'on hand'. In case you need him to resuscitate ... errm ... some ... errm ...body. Strange wording vis-à-vis this 'advisor'. If I was a non-suspected Mr. McCann I would urge the MSM to stop these nonsensical publications right now. Even the lowest among us must have 'had it'. Too much illusionists in this circus. Time for the dog act where the crowd is waiting for.

Marian Greaves wrote this............ok here to debunk this myth, he could not possibly have had anything whatsoever to do with that mans treatment let alone led this life saving stuff, he is now a Professor that lectures, he is ONLY an honorary cardiac consultant ie not on the payroll, not on the pay roll means you cannot go near a patient as you are not insured, the ONLY thing he could have done was advised on the results of the mri scan but even that is doubtful what is MORE probable is that in his capacity as a lecturer he is the one who teaches the doctors how to diagnose from an mri scan, so he is being attributed to being god like again with that, bear in mind also the doctor who spoke to the press was Doug Skehan who was his previous boss and a director of the fund for many years, pass me the sick bucket.

Is it the case that Dr Gerry's much vaunted Professor status is in fact just a ruse to keep him away from any actual patients? Tracey Kandohla can claim he is engaged in ground-breaking research, while he is actually just teaching groups of students in the good old NHS tradition of "see one, do one, teach one". Even our Tracey finds it quite difficult to big up cardiology as an exciting glamorous specialty.

The world and his wife has been forced to witness that Kate and Gerry McCann are the perfect couple over the last 10 years. They are yin and yang to each other, like twins wear matching clothes, repeat each others version of events, complement each other perfectly, in every sense of the word.

So here is an interesting one to show this is true, remember that Kate said no comment to her arguido questions except one. Well Gerry answered all of his but only one he said no comment to, enlightening:

"--- When asked if on any occasion Madeleine was injured, he says he has no comment."

Anonymous 23:59 and Anonymous 0:03, both videos are available for me (PT). It is funny, yes, that they were not capable to produce any picture of MMC with CC, whereas so many exist of KMC with CC. It always touches me when I hear Eddie barking and I think I know why. The total lack of mean intention, just doing his job to please his handler, sometimes I wish we could be as pure as that.

Yes, the Cuddle Cat toy, apparently Madeleine would take it everywhere, even to bed at night, yet, lying Kate tells the world she used to take it to work with her!!!And as you say, they have never produced even ONE photo of Madeleine with her favourite toy.One of my boys had a favourite teddy bear which he slept with every night and cherished it so much, that he still has it now (aged 25) and we have 100s of photographs of him with the teddy - it was like a part of him.

As usual, the McCanns get found out on so many lies, it's untrue - literally!

KAREN Danczuk has sparked fury with an astonishing Twitter attack on the parents of Madeleine McCann.

The ex-wife of MP Simon, who shot to fame through her sexy selfies on social media, accused Kate and Gerry McCann of “having guilt” in an explosive social media rant on Sunday.

She tweeted: “Anyone who says McCanns are innocent, just remember they left 3 children under the age of 4 alone to go out. Either Way they have guilt! KD”.

Furious followers questioned where the 33-year-old, who recently revealed how she was sexually abused by her own brother as a child, where she was getting her information.

One said: “They’ve lost their child and experienced more pain than anyone could imagine. Doubt they need your insensitive judgement now.”

Rob Tomlinson warned: “Wow, strong accusations without any facts. Be careful what you say Karen.”The McCanns, who are subjected to 150 abusive messages from Twitter trolls every day, were on holiday in Portugal when three-year-old Madeleine went missing in May 2007.

Gerry and Kate had left their three children – including toddler twins Sean and Amelie – sleeping in their apartment while they dined at a nearby tapas bar with friends.

The McCanns and their friends left the restaurant roughly every half-hour to check on their children.

When Kate returned to check on the kids about 10pm that evening she discovered that Maddie was not in her bed and was missing.

Jodie Marsh recently launched a similar Twitter attack, slamming the McCanns while apparently watching investigative journalist Mark Williams-Thomas being interviewed on This Morning about the case.

The model, 38, blasted: “In my opinion it’s all going to come crashing down for the McCanns….”.

She added: “I must admit, if it were my child I’d be on my hands & knees digging up the earth with my bare hands! Nothing else would matter…..”

Karen, who was married to Labour MP Simon Danczuk for three years, first came to public attention because of her stream of sexy selfies on social media.

She’s been in the headlines more recently after speaking out about the abuse she received at the hands of her brother.

Karen’s older brother Michael Burke was convicted of eight rapes against three different victims, including his sister, on November 30 2016.

He collapsed in court after he was found guilty of a string of sex attacks over an 18 year period between 1992 and 2010.

Karen exclusively told The Sun how her ‘monster’ of a brother robbed her of her childhood after years of abuse.

The 33-year-old gave evidence in court that helped put Burke behind bars, but admitted on an appearance on Loose Women that she “felt guilty for doing it”.

She bravely waived her right to anonymity to talk about being raped by her brother between the ages of nine and 11 to encourage other survivors of sexual abuse to speak out in supports of ITV’s Never Too Late To Tell campaign.

Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk @TheSun When you say this tweet has sparked fury, do you mean overwhelming agreement? KDKaren Danczuk added,Karen Danczuk‏@KarenDanczuk Anyone who says McCanns are innocent, just remember they left 3 children under the age of 4 alone to go out. Either Way they have guilt! KD04:08 - 6 Mar 2017

The first thing we want to point out is that it comes from the Scottish Sun and not from the Sun itself. It’s as if it’s a rebuttal of something but done discreetly so as not be as noticed.

The second thing is that the article contains a screengrab of one of Karen Danczuk’s tweet. This means they had access to her account and wanted to show that.

However, the main accusation made by Karen Danczuk is that the McCanns drugged Maddie. This was ignored. As was ignored the no DNA in the bedroom. Also ignored ref about hairbrush and toothbrush.

As readers know, we disagree that Maddie was drugged but whether they did or did not isn’t the point at the moment. The point is Karen Danczuk accused the McCanns of that and the article ignored it.

Anything related to linking the McCanns to Maddie’s death is ignored.

But neglect is highlighted.

In fact, one may think that it would be the main objective of the article.

Or it was about the veiled legal threat “Rob Tomlinson warned: “Wow, strong accusations without any facts. Be careful what you say Karen.””

We don’t recall seeing such a tweet, but we do remember this one:

“Shelley bobs @NantwichGirl @KarenDanczuk Karen please be careful. The mcCanns are not adverse to suing people who say unsubstantiated things about them in the media.”

In fact we think the updating of this article was to tone down the legal threat, which we think was quite more explicit.

No, this article has the objective, in our opinion, is to allow Karen Danczuk to backtrack: Oh look how Karen Danczuk has accused the McCanns of NEGLECT! To which Danczuk replies, oh, yeah, yes I did!! They are so, so NEGLECTFUL!!

And all accusations she made about them being involved in Maddie’s death are forgotten…

Yet another having a go at Neglect.It may be genuinely held belief, but it adds to the pile of twitter users like Katie Hopkins.Actually, people who believe M was taken because she was left and who attack parents fit the troll definition more closely, because they are attacking innocent but stupid parents.Those of us who don't believe M was abducted or wandered off, are expressing our feelings about a massive injustice which goes beyond those immediately involved.Feelings which the SCJ considers valid.

"Innocent but stupid parents". "Stupid" because unlike their acquaintances, they left a door unlocked (an euphemism for slightly open) ? Their stories about that sliding door are totally incoherent. There's no reason to suspect Fiona Payne when she states (rog) that KMC was worried about leaving that door open for Madeleine to be able to get out and look for her parents (staggering ! The child ignored where they were ! The fact that the group didn't react reveals a lot about their relations with the MCs). KMC was uncertain but actually didn't ask for opinions ! This issue was related to the supposed crying episode, the "passing remark", if it occurred again and if by chance MMC discovered she was stuck indoors, that would be worse.I've a feeling that Fiona (consciously, unconsciously I'm not sure) told that because she wanted to show how her friend was a careful mum (which I'm sure she was). What could KMC's sudden anxiety imply if not that the door was normally locked ? (as supported by GMC's first statement).

“Annienonymous2‏ @annienonymoussWould anyone have a link to the newspaper article where K8 #mccann states "those that can be implicated" ...T.I.A2:32 PM · 1 Mar 2017

It seems people are searching for origin of this quote. We think it's from us, suggesting this is what Kate was implying with something she said and it was not something she actually saidWe feel we should clarify that it seems to have come from the “Tide Change” post and not a newspaper article and it's not a quote from Kate:

The source close to heart doctor Gerry and ex GP Kate, both 48, from Rothley, Leics, added: “Any posts that are really offensive or a lie are prima facie defamatory and will be flagged up to lawyers so they can take action if necessary.

“These minor celebrities think they can say what they want without a shred of evidence and simply rehash all the old rumours. They seem to believe talking about Madeleine’s case helps raise their profile.”

Ms Danczuk posted a series of tweets after it was revealed Kate and Gerry had nearly been tricked into giving £25,000 from the Maddie Fund money to Karen Matthews, who faked daughter Shannon’s kidnap.

The 33-year-old, who found fame by posting selfies of herself, has even been blasted by some of her followers for her rant against the McCanns who say there was no evidence for her claims.

Three year old Maddie vanished from a holiday apartment in Portugal’s Praia da Luz in May 2007.

Kate and Gerry’s spokesman Clarence Mitchell said today: “We are aware of Ms Danczuk’s comments and we are simply not going to fuel this nonsense by talking about it.”

Jodie Marsh recently launched a similar Twitter attack, slamming the McCanns while apparently watching investigative journalist Mark Williams-Thomas being interviewed on This Morning about the case.

The model, 38, blasted: “In my opinion it’s all going to come crashing down for the McCanns….”.

She added: “I must admit, if it were my child I’d be on my hands & knees digging up the earth with my bare hands! Nothing else would matter…..”

It really seems that the Sun has reacted to our comment at 6 Mar 2017, 13:43:00.

Not going over, as we have already done that, of what Karen Danczuk said and is ignored in this article, we would like to ask one question:

Reading just what is written in this article, that Karen Danczuk has, allegedly, accused the McCanns of having "left 3 children under the age of 4 alone to go out", in what way is it different from what was claimed by Katie Hopkins against the McCanns?

If there is no difference, as apparently there isn't, why was not a similar action taken against Katie Hopkins?

Karen did say more than leaving the children alone in other tweets which Sun didn't publish.Maybe Katie Hopkins stuck within certain acceptable parameters of neglect but Jodie and Karen overstepped the mark?

BUT, and that's what we want to highlight, a reader who gets the news only from the MSM on this issue, someone who doesn't either have Twitter or if has doesn't follow the #McCann (which we would say would be the majority of the population), to them the papers have said that all 3 have accused the McCanns of the same thing: neglect.

There, as has been reported in the MSM, Katie Hopkins has not kept to more acceptable parameters, to use your words. She has been equally libellous.

So under this perspective and solely under it, Katie Hopkins should have had the same threats or put downs as the other 2 had, and fact is she hasn't.

Now, putting Twitter into the equation, you’re absolutely right.

However, something does not fit right with Katie Hopkins.

Either she’s afraid of “them” and so is being very careful but that implies that these people remain powerful and will succeed in never allowing truth to surface, and that makes her efforts not only hopeless but helpful in promoting neglect or,

“They” aren’t going after her because they are afraid of her but that makes it not understandable such constraint.

It looks pretty much like some entity exhorted those virtuous but malicious ladies (unless they were bitten by some kind of bee), having in common to be ignorant of the case, to accuse the poor MCs of neglect, whereas it is so obvious that they're careful parents. The truth is out there.

I am wondering whether the MSM is playing one big clever game, on one hand the MSM look like they are supporting the Mccanns but in reality the MSM is drawing peoples attention to Twitter, Facebook and to YouTube to look at the information that is already out there, you only have to look at social media and see the real facts of the case that are often quoted by the public to get the message out there.

Personally I don't believe anyone will be sued by the Mccanns but this is just my opinion.

Madeleine McCann's parents 'are set to sue' Karen Danczuk over cruel tweets saying they 'have guilt' over their daughter's disappearance

Youngster went missing during family holiday in Portugal ten years agoRepeated investigations have failed to find out what happened to herMP's estranged wife launches attack on the parents online following report

She tweeted: 'Anyone who says McCanns are innocent, just remember they left 3 children under the age of 4 alone to go out. Either Way they have guilt! KD'

Sources close to the family have revealed that the couple, who face the 10th anniversary of their daughter's disappearance in a matter of weeks, are aware of the comments as are their lawyers.

The McCann's friend said: 'People need to remember that the family's lawyers are kept fully informed of all social media and broadcast remarks which are malicious and libellous.

'Their representative is fully aware of what Karen Danczuk and others are posting.

'If anything is believed to libel them it is immediately brought to the attention of their top lawyers Carter-Ruck.

'Kate and Gerry still get angry and upset by some of the wicked things said about them. And they worry their 12-year-old twins Sean and Amelie who use the internet may see them too.'

The friend added: 'Any posts that are really offensive or a lie are prima facie defamatory and will be flagged up to lawyers so they can take action if necessary.

'These minor celebrities think they can say what they want without a shred of evidence and simply rehash all the old rumours. They seem to believe talking about Madeleine's case helps raise their profile.'

Ms Danczuk posted a series of tweets about the McCanns after seeing a report that they had nearly been tricked into giving £25,000 from the Maddie Fund to Karen Matthews, who faked her daughter's kidnap.

The mother, who found fame by posting selfies of herself online, claimed that 'someone on a council estate' would have been treated differently

But the 33-year-old was criticised by some of her 72,000 followers, with many pointing out there was no evidence for her claims.

Ryan Lamb‏ tweeted: 'They've lost their child and experienced more pain than anyone could imagine. Doubt they need your insensitive judgement now.'

Karen Bleakley‏ wrote: 'Aww Karen really sad you have taken such a harsh view they made a mistake and will have to live with that for rest of lives.'

And another Twitter user added: 'Are you telling me they haven't been punished. They live every day suffering. Stop judging!'

The McCanns were having tapas with friends close to their holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal on the night in 2007 when Maddie disappeared.

Maddie and twins Sean and Amelie had been left asleep at 8.30pm in the ground-floor apartment, while Kate and Gerry dined in a restaurant 180ft away.

The parents checked on the children throughout the evening, until Madeleine's mother discovered she was missing at 10pm.

Local police and a £13million Scotland Yard inquiry failed to unearth any significant clues as to where she went.

The McCanns, who are said to get around 150 abusive messages every day, have not commented on Ms Danczuk's tweets.

Following a similar attack on them by model Jodie Marsh recently, a source close to the couple said: 'Kate and Gerry won't be saying anything to fuel this whirlwind of nonsense. They don't want to give these peoples' egos even more exposure.'

Kate and Gerry's spokesman Clarence Mitchell said today: 'We are aware of Ms Danczuk's comments and we are simply not going to fuel this nonsense by talking about it.'

France Soir isn't exactly a tabloid. Guilhem Battut seems to have been informed that MMC had been likely sedated, the thesis of GA. The news was transformed or interpreted as overdose by the media around.I couldn't find the France Soir article on line, but a lot of articles that start with "France Soir said..."

Also, didnt KM think the twins had been drugged, she checked their breathing with a hand on their backs. recommended drug testing weeks later. did FP also confirm this. Also I remember seeing the police officers carrying the twins that night and wondering how they could have not been awake. Did the Mccanns aso not suggest that maybe all 3 children had been drugged.

Seems crazy to me that an abductor would sedate the twins (who they were not taking) and not the child they were taking, who would most likely wake up due to being disturbed at some point during the abduction, ie when first being picked up, or when going from inside to outside. How do you quantify KM`s concern for the twins being drugged and not think that she must also think that MBM had been drugged/sedated also. Now it may not be in the PJ files (im afraiD i dont know either way), but we do know that KM had these concerns and that they were also voiced by FP.

Why would you drug kids who are already sleeping like logs ? But those who saw them found that their sleep wasn't normal. A GNR stated so. Their mother, who surely knew very well how her kids slept, was obviously concerned. FP, a practising anaesthetist, noted but suggested nothing, as she said nothing when her friend announced that the patio door was left open for MMC be able to go out and look for her parents. Guess who is the dominant one !

Blaming for neglect is easy. Hence its success. Any story that makes you feel good because you wouldn't do what's at stake is bound to be preferred to any truth that disturbs you, forcing you to face reality.

Well,whatever the crack is with McCann's and msm personally for me it all for shutting these sites down greater controls on what any family should be made to put up with because of free speech blah blah, its already led to one suicide. "Trolls" we're called and every time these idiotic celebrities spout of in come the "Trolls" many share the factual information,loads insult but the majority now is bloody neglect who gives a shit whether they did or didn't your wasting your time and your breath and I for one am sick of it and quite frankly ready to Jack the lot,I was basically called a pro the other day because I believe neglect ffs. My point is this they admitted it's none worldwide they admitted and if the Portuguese and Sy decide they can use it to get them off the hook for the death and concealment they know they've done,then they will and all we will do is show outrage,just like any other cover up that's ever gone on in this world.What your actually doing right now those jumping on these pathetic msm comments section is giving all the ammunition they need for another nice little dossier of the more juicer "Trolls" for someone above us and should be adhered to enough is enough.No neglect=no abduction quite frankly no one gives a f##k

Installing a neglect-narrative may become a new way to cover up a crime / an unwelcome accident with children as victims. If Mr. and Mrs. McCann get away with this, they have set a precedent that will cause severe headaches for police and judiciary.

The SJC heard the McCann appeal but said this way, all those visiting his blog – and the media has facilitated for this to happen - will be further convinced that the Portuguese justice system is biased against the McCanns.

“"Had Maddie been given some kind of sedative to keep her quiet? Had the twins too?"

"I reported my fears that all 3 children could have been sedated."”

On the PJ Files there is no such report, and we believe that if it ever existed – which we don’t think it has it would be there.

There is nothing in PJ files to prove if the twins were sedated by anyone as no contemporaneous tests were carried out.

To be noted is the she didn't take the twins to hospital to check.

Was this to fit in with the alleged tea stain on Maddie’s pj top was all about, a possible previous attempt at drugging by an abductor?

Note also that Kate implies that drugs may have been used by a third party and not by them.

What Karen Danczuk is saying or suggesting is that it was the McCanns who sedated Maddie.

Obviously nobody knows if she was sedated or not, let alone who might have done it. We are of the opinion – and it is just our opinion – that she wasn’t.

We in the blog believe that sedation was only used, and without any harm to any of the children, on Thursday evening/night, after Maddie died and the sedation was done with the purpose of having the children asleep and out of the way while the adults thought of a way to get out of the predicament they were in.

The suggestion that Karen Dancsuk should apologise was in the spirit of advice if she was legally pursued for her tweets.

But if expressed as her opinion only, is this not covered by free speech?

Maybe that is the clarification she needs to make, as Gerry once said he had no problem with people purporting theories.

As far as we are aware, and will evidently stand corrected, the apartment was not sealed between the end of operations that night and PJ returning next day to get the T9 and take them to Portimão for statements

Kate McCann in her book seems to say clearly that apartment was not sealed:

Page 79:

“The next thing I knew, the PJ officers were heading for the front door. I felt another surge of panic. When I asked them anxiously where they were going, they said they had finished for tonight. They told us we could take whatever we needed for the twins from the children’s room. . Rather more frantically, I tried to establish what would be happening next and for the remainder of the hours of darkness. The only answer the officers gave us was that they would come back in the morning. Pressed as to when, they said it would be after nine. And with that they were gone, leaving us to our own devices. It was incomprehensible. Surely that couldn’t be it for the night? The sense of helplessness and agitation just kept intensifying.”

Page 80:

“We probably could have stayed in our apartment, but who would have wanted to? Looking back, it’s inexplicable, of course, that we should ever have been left in what was now a crime scene. We shouldn’t even have been allowed to take things out of the children’s bedroom. Mark Warner had prepared another flat for us on the first floor of an adjacent block, but Gerry and I were in no condition to be on our own. We couldn’t look after ourselves, let alone the twins. So the staff put up two extra cots in Fiona and David’s apartment and we carried a sleepy Sean and Amelie into their sitting room. But I needed to keep them close to me. I lowered myself down on to the couch with Fiona. She took a twin from me and we both sat there hugging my children. Holding one of my babies provided me with some much-needed comfort, albeit fleetingly.”

Sorry, I had to delete, too many typos. Here it is again :KMC is dreaming, by no means they could have stayed in 5A. The PJ (Victor Martins and João Barreiras) arrived (at about 0:45), they were horrified by the state of the crime scene, they immediately asked John H. through Emma K. to assign another flat to the MCs, in order for J. Barreiras to do his work. One hour or so later, when the dogs arrived, the new flat (4G) was ready and a GNR took the twins there. Kate left 5A with Fiona. GMC remained and made his first statement (see PJ report). At about 4:00 am, the two PJ officers left after having locked 5A's door and asked 2 GNR to guard the flat. This is when GMC asked the way to the church and KMC whether the roads had been blocked. The MCs decided to take the twins to the Paynes' flat. The 5A was't yet properly sealed, but it was guarded and nobody could get in.

Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse.

Total Pageviews

MESSAGE to NEWCOMERS

This blog believes that concerning the MADDIE McCANN case the following happened:

- Maddie McCanndied in the early evening of May 3rd, 2007, in the Apartment 5A. We believe the death to have been accidental.

- At the time of Maddie's death the Praia da Luz's Ocean Club was hosting a large swinging holiday in which the McCanns and friends were part of among many others.

- After Maddie's death a cover-up of unseen proportions and scope took place not to hide Maddie's death but with the main purpose of hiding the presence of swinging. To achieve that, Maddie's death had to be hidden.

- We don't believe there was any sort of negligence involved in the Maddie affair. We don't believe that T9 dined at Tapas Bar from Sunday to Wednesday. We think that on those nights they left their children with professional nannies - as did other guests - to go dine downtown PdL. On Thursday night they did use Tapas but that was simply part of what was to be "negligence"that was required to allow Maddie to be "abducted."

PJ Files

Anonymity

A MAJOR MINORITY

TRUTH is Self-Sustained

Think for yourself

Luz - THE VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED

PdL - What a place. Why does anyone holiday there?It's populated by black heroin addicts, people who rob apartments, gypsies who steal scrap and wood, scruffy moustachioed lurers of children, bogus charity collectors, suspicious street musicians, men lurking near phone booths, glasses man lurking in stairwells, blond men suspiciously lurking outside apartments, soothing couples entering apartments without permission, mysterious gangs of cleaners, men taking photographs of children on beaches... And to top it all, you have to queue for a table booking.Anonymous 11Nov 2013 12:22:00

Maybe because you can always enjoy an ice-cream in the rain?And a dip in an icy pool on arrival always attracts a crowd.Textusa 11Nov 2013 12:28:00

I like the Tapas fragile chairs and tables. They wobble nicely when cutting thick grilled steaks spilling the drinks all about! It's fun for the whole family!Anonymous 11Nov 2013 13:08:00

And how about the number of men seen carrying little blond girls in the street in the middle of the night?Anonymous 11Nov 2013 14:04:00

PdL - where families take it in turn to vomit each night, dog packs pursue and bite joggers, guests fall off catamarans, damage tendons playing tennis, have shaving accidents and stagger around apartments bleeding, domestic appliances need repair, shutters jam, baby monitors won't function at restaurants, travel cots can't be assembled.. sounds like THE VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED.Anonymous 12 Nov 2013 12:37:00

Child Catcher

Algarve - THE REGION OF THE DAMNED

“Algarve – Where Chitty Chitty Bang Bang’s Child Catcher found it ideal to roam the streets with his GYPSY-wagon:“There are children here somewhere. I can smell them. Come along, kiddie-winkies!”Algarve, the REGION OF THE DAMNED.”

Please Reconstruct I:

PJ's Declaration for Reopening Process:

"Madeleine McCann

As is the case with any situation in which a child goes missing, notwithstanding formal dismissal of the inquiry into her disappearance, and just as has always been publicly stated, the Polícia Judiciária never stopped paying close attention to any and all information that might possibly shed light on the whereabouts of the minor Madeleine McCann, the circumstances surrounding her disappearance and the identity of the perpetrator(s).

It was with this goal in mind that in March 2011 the National Director of the Polícia Judiciária entrusted a team of investigators from the North Directorate with the mission of reassessing, as a whole, the vast amount of information gathered during the inquiry, aimed at identifying data for which a more in-depth investigation might be useful and possible.

The reassessment which took place over the last two years and a half suggested new evidence to have surfaced, which, requiring the investigation to proceed, meets the requirements set out by section 279(1) of the Portuguese Code of Criminal Procedure for reopening of the inquiry.

Accordingly, a request for reopening was made to the Public Prosecutor for the jurisdiction of Portimao, and approval granted by the latter. "

The Anne Guedes Transcriptions

Permanent Suggested Reading

Quote

“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Mark Twain

Revelations

"For the righteous, a revelation is a joyous event, the realization of a divine truth but for the wicked, revelations can be far more terrifying, when dark secrets are exposed and sinners are punished for their trespasses." Quote from the TV Series "Revenge" (T2 - Ep9)

Truth

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.Arthur Schopenhauer

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.Winston Churchill

The Revolution

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.George Orwell

The Revolution Goes Viral

"Once information networks become social, the implications are massive: truth can now travel faster than lies, and all propaganda becomes instantly flammable. Sure, you can try to insert spin, but the instantly networked consciousness of millions of people will set it right: they act like white blood cells against infection so that ultimately the truth, or something close to it, persists much longer than disinformation"The Guardian (04Jan12)

We must build dikes of courage to hold back the flood of fear. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts Winston Churchill

PRECIOUS, SO TRUE, WORDS

“One coincidence, two coincidences – maybe they’re still coincidences. Any more than that and it stops being coincidence.”

Kate McCann

(in MADELEINE, by Kate McCann, published in 2011 by Bantam Press, pg. 328)

Imagine...

"This says it all, Ms Loach hit the nail on the head!

"Ms Loach replied: “Imagine the public believing that you covered up your child’s death and then sought to make money out of it. They feel shame, humiliation and anguish."

Yes, that's exactly what we, the public, believe, because that's exactly what they did! And, their "shame, humiliation and anguish" are because they know we know!"

Comment posted by Anonymous to Textusa at Sep 16, 2013, 8:36:00 AM on "McCann vs Amaral Libel Trial" post referring to Mockumentary maker Emma Loach's testimony on the 1st day of said trial as one of McCann's defense witness.

Legal Disclaimer

This blog expresses exclusively the exchange of ideas and of opinions, between WHITE HATS, so is not responsible for the use, misuse or any form of interpretation (mainly misinterpretation) of its content, as although it uses a public medium, as is the internet, it's of PRIVATE nature, very much like any other conversation that takes place in a restaurant, pub or any other public location, where FREEDOM OF SPEECH is exercised.

Sound Explanation for Viciousness

Compliments from the Maggots' Lair:

- “…all the others pale into insignificance when compared to textusa.”

- “I think she should be on the streets and off the internet"

Chinagirl):

- “Disgusting piece of slime.”

(Raptor):

- “Yikes ! That's disgusting.”

(preciousramotswe):

- “You are right. It's a shambolic mess of vitriol and obtuseness. But then they always are. The one that some claimed finally 'proved' who was carrying who during the Smith sighting is a masterpiece of deliberately confused arguments in which labrynthine plots are used to cover how empty the central thesis is”

Out of the Blue (or... Black?)

Hey textusa How are you? well I hope,just thought I would tell you that there are videos about you on youtube, claiming you are an internet predator who stole her daughters identity and prowls the forums for young boys, they say you are welsh!! I think its a case of mistaken identity because are you not portuguese and male? Anyway great blog. keep it up.(Anon., Nov 13th, 05:43)

Conversation from the "Lightless Zone"

sabot:

“Wot Round Table?”

bonnybraes1:

“He/she/it invented a barking mad 'theory' about no-one actually having eaten in the Tapas, because he/she/it couldn't grasp the table arrangements.”

So, because textusa doesn't understand stuff like that, all the Tapas group, the staff, everyone, were lying.

OMG - you don't suppose textusa is actually Gonc, do you?”

sansouci:“Could be Bonny.

The 'theories' about the table and the watersports are really so far beyond bizarre, that I get the feeling that 'textusa' could actually be 'pisstaka'.”

BLACK BUT TRUE WORDS

“Because no-one is more vicious in their search for payback that those who realise they have allowed themselves to be taken for a fool” (A "boomerang" comment left by an Anonymous (Insane?) at Sep 22, 2012 2:06:00 PM)

Insane's IMPORTANT Comments

“…How would any of you idiots like it if your name came into the public domain because you were witness to a crime, and some mad bitch set up a site in which she called you a liar, and claimed you were actually involved in the crime you witnessed? Just ponder on that for a moment”

Aug 28, 2011 9:27:00 AM

“…Where is your sense of shame or decency in accusing innocent witnesses of being involved in covering up the death of a child?

I see no shame or decency on here - just an utter indifference to the rights or feelings of others.

I notice no-one had the balls to answer my question about how you would feel if this was done to you - if you were a witness to a crime and some deranged cow on the internet accused you of being involved. You are all a complete disgrace.”

Aug 28, 2011 1:09:00 PM

FOOT IN THE MOUTH DISEASE

Insane (Nov 14, 2012 11:37:00 PM):

Oh look here - amazing what one can find out by means of a couple of emails to Mark Warner.

You are toast, lady. Finished.

I am going to enjoy this more than is actually decent.

Textusa (Nov 15, 2012 8:50:00 AM):

Well it seems that you're quite privy with the Ocean Club aren't you?

Them giving YOU the information about their own mails?

And you threatening us based on information that YOU apparently got from the Ocean Club.

That's really interesting, isn't it?

Insane (Nov 15, 2012 10:47:00 PM):

One thing I really like about Mark Warner is how helpful their staff are. Really go the extra mile for someone needing information. IYKWIM

:)

Textusa (Nov 16, 2012 11:17:00 AM):

Thank you for confirming that Mark Warner Staff are supplying YOU with information pertaining the Maddie Affair.

Insane's Moment of Rare Beauty

“It would be more suspicious if every account tallied. Police expect to find contradictions, don't tell me you did not know this?” (Nov 22, 2012 3:38:00 PM), when providing an opinion on contradictions from various statements in the PJ Files.

“I don't give a rat's arse about the statements which tally too closely - of course some of them tally too closely, there is an in depth analysis of them on my blog, the one you are not invited to.” (Nov 22, 2012 4:08:00 PM), when, exactly 30 minutes later, provides an opposite opinion, in this case about the fact that some of Tapas' Staff's statements tally too closely.

Insane the Entrepeneur?

"I'd love to stay, but I have a report to write, and it won't do itself, will it?" (Nov 29, 2012 8:14:00 PM)Insane the Disruptor, a new profession shown inNew Career Opportunities

Insane's Proposal for a New Legal Disclaimer

Textusa's new disclaimer. Please ignore all previous versions

''This blog expresses exclusively the exchange of ideas and opinions between people who have sniffed WAY too many solvents, and the imaginary people who live at the bottom of their garden, and so is not responsible for the enormous fines, possible imprisonment, or lifelong incarceration in a mental hospital which may result from it's content, as although it is on the interclickyweb, it is of a private nature, accompanied only by the voices in their heads, very much like any other conversation which takes place in a psychiatric ward between people rocking backwards and forwards in their seat and eating the wallcoverings, where FREEDOM OF SPEECH is exercised in the half hour per day of free association which the inmates are allowed.''Comment NOT published but submitted on Aug 22, 2011 10:17:00 PM

Kate's Round Table

INSANE'S BLOG

We waited so long for the link...

A possible explanation for the wait: "As I have made perfectly clear, you and your sort will never have access to my blog. We are particular about who we invite, and would not include screaming harpies and riff-faff like yourself."unpublished comment from Insane at Nov 23, 2012 10:55:00 AM

Then, a glimmer of hope?“Publishing elsewhere the posts Textusa refuses to publish is also appropriate - and also gives you fools a chance to read what she withholds from you, knowing that you would desert her if you were aware of how much trouble she leads you into.” (Nov 29, 2012 12:40:00 PM)

No, it wasn’t to be so… :“For the last time, you will never be provided with a link for my blog - you are not welcome there and will never be given access”(Nov 29, 2012 1:38:00 PM)